[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [council] RE: Additional note on Cairo study session ==> famoustrademark protection
The review of trademark law would focus exclusively on the Paris Convention
and the TRIPS agreement. Here is the five minute discussion that I am
looking at.
According to WIPO's own report, "the goal of this WIPO Process is not to
create new rights of intellectual property, nor to accord greater protection
to intellectual property in cyberspace than that which exists elsewhere,"
RFC 3, para. 32. The scope of protection afforded by the Paris Convention,
the TRIPS agreement and the TLT is broad, but not absolute. Not every United
Nation member is a signatory to the Paris Convention, even fewer member
states are signatories to the TRIPS agreement, and only a handful of member
states have signed the TLT. Moreover, nothing in these agreements, either
individually or collectively extend protection to a mark in a country where
it is NOT famous. The recommendation adopted by the WIPO Standing Committee
on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications
(SCT) in September 1999 is designed primarily for adoption by individual
member states do govern activity within that state. How can this be
reconciled with the fact that Working Group B is considering protection of
marks on a global basis in a global medium of communication?
Does that clarify your concern Jonathan? I agree that a five minute summary
of world trademark law would be futile.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Cohen [mailto:jcohen@shapirocohen.com]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 10:17 AM
To: Esther Dyson
Cc: mpalage@infonetworks.com; mclaughlin@pobox.com; council@dnso.org;
Jonathan Weinberg; Michael Palage; Mike Roberts
Subject: Re: [council] RE: Additional note on Cairo study session ==>
famoustrademark protection
E A review of the trade mark law of 'which country'? even the principles
differ
from system to system. One of the factors in the length and heat of the
debate is
that it has (understandably)focussed on the law in the U.S. and has drawn
into the
discussion strongly held views of various ''factions'' again primarily
(though not
exclusively e.g. privacy issues)in the U.S.Most of the Case law referred to
and the
underlying constitutional issues have been American.It is obvious why this
has been
the case and there is nothing nefarious about it BUT it should be understood
as a
fact and it's ramifications must also be discussed.As the original
Chairperson of
WRKNG GRP "B" I set as a goal as diverse a group to discuss the issues as
possible.....very few participants appeared particularly from non-english
parts of
the globe.
As to a discussion of the issues in W.G. "B" and a general overview of Trade
Mark
law I would be pleased to meet with my fellow Board Members together or
individually if my experience in this field would be useful
regards
Jonathan
sther Dyson wrote:
> Thanks! Let's do a similar matrix for WG-C - with cross-references if
possible.
>
> Esther
>
> At 10:55 am 01/09/2000 -0500, Michael D. Palage wrote:
> >I believe the best way to educate the Board, NC & audience on the subject
> >matter of Working Group B is as follows. A 30 minute power point
> >presentation, providing a brief 5 minute overview of trademark law and 25
> >minutes discussing the hot button topics and where the different factions
> >within Working Group B stand.
> >
> >The 5 minute overview of trademark law is important because I personally
> >believe that Working Group B's policies and procedures are likely to be
> >challenged in a court of law and therefore must be scrutinized to
withstand
> >judicial review. The issues will be presented sequentially with a matrix
> >identifying where each position paper, group or constituency stands on
that
> >issue. I envision this entire matrix being reduced to a single two or
three
> >page handout (cheat sheet) for each NC or Board member to have as a
> >reference resource.
> >
> >There is a symbiotic relationship between Working Group B and C and I
> >believe it is best to address these issues collectively. Addressing these
> >issues individually will only further delay the end result that many are
> >striving for "the controlled responsible growth of the name space."
> >
> >On a side note. I have been in discussion with Eric Menge from the Small
> >Business Administration - Office of Advocacy. Last week they held a
> >roundtable discussion on Working Group C's report. I participated via
> >telephone conference and believe that it was beneficial in crystallizing
the
> >points of controversy. Eric plans to have a similar roundtable discussion
on
> >Working Group B's work prior to Cairo to further illicit public comment.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Andrew McLaughlin [mailto:mclaughlin@pobox.com]
> >Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2000 2:32 PM
> >To: council@dnso.org; Jonathan Weinberg; Michael Palage
> >Cc: Esther Dyson; Mike Roberts
> >Subject: Additional note on Cairo study session ==> famous
trademark
> >protection
> >
> >To the Names Council:
> >
> >Michael Palage notes that WG-B expects to have its report posted for
public
> >comment prior to the Cairo meetings. Accordingly, I think that it makes
> >sense to include famous trademark protection as an element of the Board's
> >study session on March 9.
> >
> >Perhaps Michael can suggest how we might structure a set of presentations
to
> >help educate the Board, NC, and audience with respect to the issues
before
> >WG-B. Time considerations will be important, of course, so perhaps it
makes
> >sense to think of presenters who can present a range of positions, and
not
> >just advocates for a single particular point of view.
> >
> >--Andrew
> >
> >
>
> Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes!
> chairman, EDventure Holdings
> chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers
> edyson@edventure.com
> 1 (212) 924-8800 -- 1 (212) 924-0240 fax
> 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor)
> New York, NY 10011 USA
> http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org
>
> PC Forum: 12 to 15 March 2000, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona
> Book: "Release 2.1: A design for living in the digital age"
> High-Tech Forum in Europe: October 2000 - probably Barcelona
--
Shapiro Cohen
Group of Intellectual Property Practices
Ottawa, Canada
Telephone: (613)232-5300
Facsimile: (613) 563-9231
________________________________________________________________________
This correspondence is intended for the person to whom it is addressed
and contains information that is confidential, and/or privileged to the
named recipient, and may be proprietary in nature. It is not to be used
by any other person and/or organization. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by telephone (collect)
and/or return e-mail.